N D DeBruhl1, L W Bassett, N W Jessop, A M Mason. 1. Iris Cantor Center for Breast Imaging, Department of Radiological Sciences, UCLA School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA 90095-6952, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: to learn about mobile mammography in the United States. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A survey of 82 questions was designed, pilot tested, and sent to mobile mammography facilities. The questions addressed many aspects of mobile programs, including administrative, financial, equipment, personnel, film processing, quality assurance, and communication of results. RESULTS: Of the 367 facilities that were mailed surveys, 159 facilities completed the survey, and 30 (19%) of those had discontinued their mobile programs. Seventy-six of 158 (48%) mobile facilities had performed mobile mammography for 1-5 years, and 69 of 158 (44%) had performed mobile mammography for more than 5 years. Seventy-two of 156 (46%) facilities were hospital-owned, and 25 of 156 (16%) were radiologist-owned. One hundred seven of 159 (67%) mobile facilities performed screening only. One hundred fourteen of 152 (75%) facilities charged +80.00 or less for screening. Mobile facilities averaged 20 examinations per day and served diverse populations. Sixty-seven of 159 (42%) facilities accepted self-referred women. Thirty-one percent of the facilities performed on-board processing. Only 71 of 149 (47%) facilities were financially profitable or breaking even, but 112 of 154 (73%) facilities would undertake a mobile project again. CONCLUSION: Mobile programs provide an opportunity to increase access to screening mammography, but they face many obstacles.
PURPOSE: to learn about mobile mammography in the United States. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A survey of 82 questions was designed, pilot tested, and sent to mobile mammography facilities. The questions addressed many aspects of mobile programs, including administrative, financial, equipment, personnel, film processing, quality assurance, and communication of results. RESULTS: Of the 367 facilities that were mailed surveys, 159 facilities completed the survey, and 30 (19%) of those had discontinued their mobile programs. Seventy-six of 158 (48%) mobile facilities had performed mobile mammography for 1-5 years, and 69 of 158 (44%) had performed mobile mammography for more than 5 years. Seventy-two of 156 (46%) facilities were hospital-owned, and 25 of 156 (16%) were radiologist-owned. One hundred seven of 159 (67%) mobile facilities performed screening only. One hundred fourteen of 152 (75%) facilities charged +80.00 or less for screening. Mobile facilities averaged 20 examinations per day and served diverse populations. Sixty-seven of 159 (42%) facilities accepted self-referred women. Thirty-one percent of the facilities performed on-board processing. Only 71 of 149 (47%) facilities were financially profitable or breaking even, but 112 of 154 (73%) facilities would undertake a mobile project again. CONCLUSION: Mobile programs provide an opportunity to increase access to screening mammography, but they face many obstacles.
Authors: Sarah B Massin-Short; Minerva A Grullón; Christine M Judge; Karen R Ruderman; Milagro Grullón; Vilma Lora Journal: Public Health Rep Date: 2010 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 2.792
Authors: Ami Vyas; Suresh Madhavan; Traci LeMasters; Elvonna Atkins; Sara Gainor; Stephenie Kennedy; Kimberly Kelly; Linda Vona-Davis; Scot Remick Journal: J Community Health Date: 2012-06
Authors: Alex T Price; Casey Canfield; Geoffrey D Hugo; James A Kavanaugh; Lauren E Henke; Eric Laugeman; Pamela Samson; Clair Reynolds-Kueny; Elizabeth A Cudney Journal: JCO Glob Oncol Date: 2022-05